The War in the Ukraine

Janiz

Senior Member
She seems to steam just fine. The claim about the Makarov was utterly nonsense from the beginning.
How did you manage to discern Makarov from Essen other than taking a random tweet at face value? A photo of both of them side by side would be enough rather than this.
 

Bill Blazo

Junior Member
Registered Member
If it's true, doesn't this kinda prove they expected rapid victory (before the mud season kicks in)?
Yeah they obviously expected a rapid victory. The Russian plan was never to lose hundreds of tanks and thousands of soldiers. I've never been persuaded by pro-Russian takes that the attack on Kyiv was a feint. Alexander taking a few hundred Companion cavalry across the Persian front at Gaugamela, that was a feint. Sending over ten thousand troops with hundreds of tanks and artillery pieces to capture a particular city looks like a regular attack. But this is war; plans never survive contact with the enemy. The Russians lost round 1 and then they adapted rather well. Honestly what Putin's stupid ass didn't realize is that getting Kyiv would've always been a wasteful prize, because after you get it you have to hold it. And that requires enormous amounts of resources, which you obviously cannot deploy on other fronts where they could be more useful. So it's actually a blessing in disguise for the Russians that they failed in the north. It allowed them to see what they should've been doing all along, which is destroying the Ukrainian army on the eastern front.
 

Atomicfrog

Major
Registered Member
Yeah they obviously expected a rapid victory. The Russian plan was never to lose hundreds of tanks and thousands of soldiers. I've never been persuaded by pro-Russian takes that the attack on Kyiv was a feint. Alexander taking a few hundred Companion cavalry across the Persian front at Gaugamela, that was a feint. Sending over ten thousand troops with hundreds of tanks and artillery pieces to capture a particular city looks like a regular attack. But this is war; plans never survive contact with the enemy. The Russians lost round 1 and then they adapted rather well. Honestly what Putin's stupid ass didn't realize is that getting Kyiv would've always been a wasteful prize, because after you get it you have to hold it. And that requires enormous amounts of resources, which you obviously cannot deploy on other fronts where they could be more useful. So it's actually a blessing in disguise for the Russians that they failed in the north. It allowed them to see what they should've been doing all along, which is destroying the Ukrainian army on the eastern front.
Yep it was taking the chance for a quick win if Ukrainian chain of command collapse in the first weeks to post the troops there. It relieved the troops east of reinforcement for a while too.
 

enroger

Junior Member
Registered Member
Yeah they obviously expected a rapid victory. The Russian plan was never to lose hundreds of tanks and thousands of soldiers. I've never been persuaded by pro-Russian takes that the attack on Kyiv was a feint. Alexander taking a few hundred Companion cavalry across the Persian front at Gaugamela, that was a feint. Sending over ten thousand troops with hundreds of tanks and artillery pieces to capture a particular city looks like a regular attack. But this is war; plans never survive contact with the enemy. The Russians lost round 1 and then they adapted rather well. Honestly what Putin's stupid ass didn't realize is that getting Kyiv would've always been a wasteful prize, because after you get it you have to hold it. And that requires enormous amounts of resources, which you obviously cannot deploy on other fronts where they could be more useful. So it's actually a blessing in disguise for the Russians that they failed in the north. It allowed them to see what they should've been doing all along, which is destroying the Ukrainian army on the eastern front.

Yup, it was a monumental fuck up. I was perplexed by Putin's decision to start the war in the first place, now it seems to me his decision was partly due to increasing likelihood of Ukraine joining NATO on the one hand and partly prompt by false assessment of Ukrainian resolve on the other....

Which begs the question, where did Russia get the intelligence that Ukraine will fold easily? If they've had realistic assessment would Putin start the war?

Hmmm... I'm smelling conspiracy
 

Stealthflanker

Senior Member
Registered Member
Still curious on what Ukrainian use to launch the Brimestone. I would guess a modified version of Rb-17 infantry based launcher.
 

Abominable

Major
Registered Member
Yup, it was a monumental fuck up. I was perplexed by Putin's decision to start the war in the first place, now it seems to me his decision was partly due to increasing likelihood of Ukraine joining NATO on the one hand and partly prompt by false assessment of Ukrainian resolve on the other....

Which begs the question, where did Russia get the intelligence that Ukraine will fold easily? If they've had realistic assessment would Putin start the war?

Hmmm... I'm smelling conspiracy
I don't think anyone knew what would happen the moment Russia invaded. Having a lot of USSR era people in power who remembered the Ukraine as a region culturally close to Russia didn't help. Like the middle east and ISIS, the Ukraine has undergone a lot of American induced nazification over the past 20 years.

Starting a war was the right move, it was clear NATO had plans to invade and regime change Russia. The only question is does Putin have what it takes to finish the war.
 

pmc

Major
Registered Member
it is psychological more important to shoot a fighter with pilot inside than destroying it on ground without pilot.
i am still figuring out utility of drones that need runways in this situation.
Su-35 class fighter can now use its TVC efficiently to do tighter turns hunting smaller drones with gun.
Ukraine used mix and match of fighters and drones on same target. give it way more resources than it deserved.
Yeah they obviously expected a rapid victory. The Russian plan was never to lose hundreds of tanks and thousands of soldiers. I've never been persuaded by pro-Russian takes that the attack on Kyiv was a feint. Alexander taking a few hundred Companion cavalry across the Persian front at Gaugamela, that was a feint. Sending over ten thousand troops with hundreds of tanks and artillery pieces to capture a particular city looks like a regular attack. But this is war; plans never survive contact with the enemy. The Russians lost round 1 and then they adapted rather well. Honestly what Putin's stupid ass didn't realize is that getting Kyiv would've always been a wasteful prize, because after you get it you have to hold it. And that requires enormous amounts of resources, which you obviously cannot deploy on other fronts where they could be more useful. So it's actually a blessing in disguise for the Russians that they failed in the north. It allowed them to see what they should've been doing all along, which is destroying the Ukrainian army on the eastern front.
Was there any training with Su-25 and Ka-52 in prior years in Belarus that we can conclude they were serious about that North Part through Belarus rather than driving from South as practically all large scale training done in Southern Military district. they may just dump older stuff through north. and even now further movement through Crimea.
 

Michaelsinodef

Senior Member
Registered Member
Yup, it was a monumental fuck up. I was perplexed by Putin's decision to start the war in the first place, now it seems to me his decision was partly due to increasing likelihood of Ukraine joining NATO on the one hand and partly prompt by false assessment of Ukrainian resolve on the other....
At this point, I'm honestly rather convinced that Putin might actually have gotten spooked by the chance of Ukraine getting nukes.

Which might have been the straw that broke the camels back.

Zelensky and other people from his government going out and saying such.
And as it stands, Ukraine, before the war, would actually be one of the countries which could manufacture nukes by themselves (nukes and nuclear reactors was once made there, not to mention there actually being nuclear reactors in Ukraine, and also ofc older retired specialist who has worked with nuclear reactors and possibly nukes).
 
Top